TANGELLA RAMA DEVI Vs. STATE OF A.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present Criminal Appeal is filed aggrieved by the judgment dtd. 5/2/2013 in C.C.No.44 of 2010 on the file of the learned II Additional Special Judge for SPE and ACB Cases, at Hyderabad (for short, "the trial Court").

(2.) Heard Mr. Pulimamidi Shashidhar Reddy, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr. Sridhar Chikyala, learned Standing Counsel and Special Public Prosecutor for ACB and Mr. Vizarath Ali, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing for respondent State. Perused the record.

(3.) The brief facts of the case are that on 3/11/2004, one Smt Ravula Ramadevi/de facto complainant gave a complaint to DSP ACB stating that on 20/11/2004, she gave an application to MRO, Julapally for issuance of the Widow confirmation Certificate. Then he instructed her to obtain an endorsement from the Village Panchayat Secretary and Revenue Inspector. On 21/10/2004, she went to the MRO, Julapally and enquired about the Village Panchayat Secretary. Again she went to the house of one T. Ramadevi/accused at her native place i.e., Peddapally. The de facto complainant showed the endorsement of Patwari and requested the accused to make an endorsement. On such request, it is alleged that the said T. Ramadevi asked the de facto complainant to pay Rs.1,500.00 towards bribe to endorse on the material paper. On 31/10/2004, the accused again asked the de facto complainant to pay an amount of Rs.1,200.00 on the date of endorsement and the rest of the amount later. As the de facto complainant was not willing to pay the said money, upon obtaining permission from the competent authority, the present complaint was registered by the DSP ACB as Crime No.9/ACB- KNR/2004 under Sec. 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, "the PC Act").